Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

nk497 writes "Dell's 'Project Sputnik' laptop is now on sale. The XPS 13 Developer Edition comes with Ubuntu 12.04 pre-installed, and costs $1,549 — $50 more than the same model running Windows. The Ubuntu Ultrabook is the result of a skunkworks project to optimise the open-source OS to run on Dell projects, to create better laptops for developers. The idea of the project was to create a laptop for developers, based around 'the idea that developers are the kings of IT and set the agenda for web companies, who in turn, set the agenda for the whole industry,' Dell said." Reader skade88 points out a positive review from Ars Technica.

I bought a Dell Laptop running Ubuntu for my sister years ago when they first started selling Linux laptops, it was at least as much as the same one with Windows, and it was loaded with tons of crapware. I booted it up, saw Dell's junk all over the screen and just wiped it clean and installed Ubuntu fresh.

Microsoft is essentially paying a large builder like Dell to put Windows on the systems. Linux, on the other hand, has no one paying Dell, so that $50 premium probably represents the loss those marketing dollars.

Well, MS and everybody else. All that bloatware that comes on the machine is paid for by Cyberlink, Symantec, McAffee, and other respective software makers. They pay because a certain percentage of the people upgrade to full fledged products. With Linux, these companies tend not to make software, or the software isn't needed, because Linux includes just about everything by default. Maybe it has something to do with licensing. With Linux, if you want to play DVDs, then you legally have to pay for the decod

Dell did a lot of work to make sure drivers were solid. Its not cheap to make a laptop have a perfect out of the box experience.

Exactly. What people don't realize is that to provide a good experience for end users, putting Linux (any distro) on a computer entails more work for the manufacturer than just installing Windows and letting Microsoft sort out the hardware compatibility issues.

And I'm happy to pay $50 more for a Linux laptop than a Windows laptop. That's not a significant amount of money compared to the price of the machine, and it sends a clear message that we are willing to pay real money for a higher quality operating system. Finally, it dispels the myth that Linux users are cheapskates and self-filters those users who would buy a Linux laptop just to pirate Windows.

I'd see it as a $50 dollar bribe to dell to keep linux support rolling. Hapily pay it, especially if I am paying $1500 for a laptop to start with, I know I'd have another $50 to spend, just as another figure to boost sales numbers to vote with my wallet.

I was subscribed to original blog announcing this for a while, and developer after developer asked for more virtical screen resolution. As far as I am aware the project brief was to use existing hardware so that option was never viable.

I gave up following it in the end, because the other ideas - to try and pre-configure software configurations for use seemed crazy in the face of the flexibility of the Ubuntu synaptic package which could acheive a more flexible goal with less work.

Apparently they do have a ppa for driver updates, which is at least something. If they test, work with hardware vendors, provide supprt, etc, it also costs them. That aside, I'm actually willing to pay a bit to show that what they're doing is appreciated. The way we're heading with Microsoft and Apple, we're going to need a platform taht will let us run any software we want in a few years.

Which if you need to take the laptop with you a lot can make a huge difference. My housemates 11 inch mac air is a about the same as the dell being advertised but with a smaller screen and only weighs under 1kg. making it a much nicer machine to carry around than the dell. The 13 inch mac air is almost identical to the dell.

As a developer what I would really like is an actual touch screen so that I can test out mobile user interfaces without flipping between the laptop and my phone.

With my webcam, I can attach facial expressions to code comments.In 1080p, I can write single lines of code longer and longer, negating the need for childish multiline programs.My nVidia Quadro means that I can seamlessly wobble windows...I use a desktop tetrapolyhedron instead of a mere cube.With HDMI and bluray, I can watch youtube videos about Java and other promising technologies at gigantic size.

Not to mention--I assume Dell doesn't get any money for crapware on the Linux variant. (I have no idea how much money Dell gets for crapware, so I don't know if it is enough to totally offset the license for Windows, but it's a thought anyway)

I think you hit on EXACTLY why the price is higher. Not some 'deal with Microsoft' that, if uncovered would mean a world of hurt for both Dell and Microsoft, but that they are losing a revenue stream by not having crapware installed! Things are beginning to make a little more sense now.

Last I heard (unverified unchecked fact coming up) you could send off for a rebate of $20 for not wanting to use a preinstalled MSFT OS.

That means they are double dipping on this and that's just annoying.
They could have asked a community member to make the OS perfect out of the box and they would have done it for love. Gouging Linux users like this is right out of order. It's not about the money, it's the fact they are Doing It Wrong.

Dell did a lot of work to make sure drivers were solid. Its not cheap to make a laptop have a perfect out of the box experience.

Exactly. What people don't realize is that to provide a good experience for end users, putting Linux (any distro) on a computer entails more work for the manufacturer than just installing Windows and letting Microsoft sort out the hardware compatibility issues.

Really? Because if you just pick chipsets that tend to work out of the box--AMD or Intel graphics, Intel wireless (Broadcom too, with firmware), most on-board sound and ethernet, etc etc etc... basically, anything fairly common--it JUST FUCKING WORKS. People have been installing Linux on Linux-doesn't-work-on-this-says-the-manufacturer hardware for years and it just works.

The last time I had a hardware problem with a laptop, it was an old 1999 HP laptop that had a bad BIOS with an incorrect ACPI table; I patched the Linux kernel driver to carry the correct table (Microsoft's driver did this too), but eventually just found the (erroneous) table in a BIOS dump and hex-edited it to the correct value, then flashed it onto my bios. Those days are long gone; things just work these days.

'Just picking the right parts' does not happen for free. Somebody has to find 'the right parts' (that also fit in with the other requirements of the box (including price point). Somebody has to verify that 'the right parts' do indeed work with the distro you are using. Somebody has to create the install image, and verify that it is good. Somebody has to decide how much of the production run should be devoted to this config. Somebody has to find room in the warehouse to store a different config. Somebody has to ensure that those boxes are actually getting sold and not just collecting dust. Somebody has to write (and test) the call center scripts. Somebody has to update the sales system to include the new config (including it's description).

None of that stuff is free. So you add up how much you are spending doing all those things, and divide it by the expected number of sales. That is how much is costs per box.

You don't seem to understand the difference between doing something for yourself, and creating a product for sale. Yes, if you are building your own PC you can do what you said, and if you're lucky it will work right out of the gate. If you're not so lucky you may have to do some tweaking, or otherwise understand that there are certain things that just don't quite work right. If you're putting your name on a product, selling it, and offering a warranty on it, that won't do. You don't want all of your cu

You just pick the right parts. You include "works well with Linux" as one of the business requirements when designing the thing.
THAT is not worth $50 per laptop.

Really? I've been using Linux on laptops for over 10 years and wasted many days trying to get things to work over time. Actually I've never seen power management work correctly under linux - not in combination with hardware graphics acceleration, wifi, and external displays. (Even my MacBook running OSX still gets confused and needs an occasional reboot...) Nowadays laptops dynamically switch from Ivy Bridge graphics to the NVidia card to save power... I'd be amazed if Linux can even use both (seems like I remember a lot of tinkering on a Thinkpad T400, one of the first dual-graphics solutions, to get that working), let alone switch dynamically.

I just ordered a Windows 7 laptop from Dell and plan to shrink the Windows partition a bit to make room for a linux install. If I could have added a preinstalled Linux multi-boot as a $50 option, or a $150 option, I certainly would have (it's a work machine).

That's what I always do... Never owned any laptops besides Dells, won't buy any besides Dells.. their corporate models that is,.. When I feel the need to refresh my current laptop, which is a Latitude D620, I go to the Dell Outlet, find a "scratch&dent" of the model I want, and buy it.. Usually priced about20% below the same model from "build-to-order"... On arrival, the hard drive is pulled and stored with the un-EULA'ed Windows install intact, and another320-500GB SATA drive is installed, and Mint Linux gets installed on it.. The drive pull is incase theres a warrantee issue during the warantee period.. I pull the linux drive, slap the Windows drive back in to allow all the diags they have you run. After the warantee period, the windows drive gets wiped and reused.. Been doing this for myself and friends for about 5 years.. It used to be Ubuntu until the Unity turd was shoved down Ubuntu users throats, now Mint is the OS-of-choice... Never had ANY driver problems with Mint on any Dell Latitude I've installed it on, BUT upon my first clean install of Ubuntu 12.04 on a Latitude D620 with the Broadcomm wifi, which by the way worked perfectly first-time/everytime under Ubuntu 10.04, the wifi driver showed loaded in an lsmod, but network-manager did not indicate the wifi stuff was loaded.. Went to Mint (Maya), and once again, worked perfectly immediately.. Having been a loyal Ubuntu-ite since 7.04, I strongly believe Canonical/Ubuntu has truly jumped the shark.. Mint for me and mine from here on out...

So the 'Linux Community' has access to Dell's designs and prototypes before they go on the market? If not, then how does the 'Linux Community' ensure that the product will work before Dell releases it?

Also, can you show me a site where the 'Linux Community' guarantees (as in, will replace the box) that any particular configuration of Linux will work on any specific box? No, you cannot, because they can't and don't do that. Dell does.

Perhaps, but I just assumed it was other costs. For example.... if yopu sell windows laptops, and someone calls with a problem, support staff has to make the call as to whether this is a defect or not, and may have to help the user fix it, depending on the details.

Generally speaking, everything I have seen says that support staff for linux and other unix-like OSs get paid more than the windows folks. Not to mention whatever R&D they have to put into it.

If yopu sell windows laptops, and someone calls with a problem, support staff has to make the call as to whether this is a defect or not, and may have to help the user fix it, depending on the details.

From Dell? Do something different? I doubt it. Channeling a very old post -

- User calls up Dell Linux support --

SUPPORT: "Hi, I'm Bob, from Wheatfield, Kansas".USER: "What?"SUPPORT: "My name is Bob, from Dell Support here in Kansas"USER: "OK, I'm having a problem with my Linux laptop"SUPPORT: "Is it plugged in?"USER: "Yes, it's plugged in, the battery reads 90% charge."SUPPORT: "Can you look at the plug in the wall and verify it is plugged in firmly to the wall socket?"USER: "I've already done that."SUPPORT: "Please to look at the connectors on the power brick and make sure they are firmly attached."USER: "I've already done that."SUPPORT: "Please recheck those connections as we cannot proceed until you have afirmated that they are connected."USER: (Sighs) "OK, Don't you want to know what problem I'm having?"SUPPORT: "We will be happy to get to that issue in a moment. For now can you please reboot your computer."USER: (Sighs) "OK."SUPPORT: "Excellent! Now please re install the operating system"USER: -- Click ---

Actually, it might be the way to do it. Linux is out there, for free, in many forms, and people who see free as being a major point have already downloaded it. Whilst *we* know that the extra $50 is probably because they don't receive the same crap-ware subsidies, it'd be easy to pitch it as "it's $50 more because it's a better operating system". Sometimes charging more will automatically make something seem better...I can see it now..."Well sir, yes, you could have the Windows option, but for a measly $50 we can upgrade you to a more secure, stable operating system that comes with a huge library of free software and all future upgrades will be free, you'll save money the first time Microsoft brings out a new Windows."

Why would Dell care enough about people wanting Linux laptops to want to shut them up, but not to actually sell the hardware to them?

For Dell, it really doesn't matter. They're a corporation; their sole reason d'etre is to make money. If they can make money on you by selling you a Linux laptop, why wouldn't they? And if you'll pay $50 extra for that "privilege", then they'll happily charge you that, too. There's no need for inane conspiracy theories here.

Practically? This clearly demonstrates that it pays for the windows license and is also a revenue stream. Either that or Dell is sticking it to linux users just to get a few more bucks... Probably a windows machine that they just pay some high school student to install linux onto....

Who wants to take a bet there is a windows 7 key on the bottom of the laptop?

Practically? This clearly demonstrates that it pays for the windows license and is also a revenue stream.

Or, it demonstrates that there isn't a lot of competition in the market for manufacturer-optimized linux-installed laptops, and that Dell is using the lack of competition in that market to extract rents. The idea that prices can be expected to closely mirror manufacturer costs is correct so far as the expected long-term result in a competitive market where no player is pricing based on influencing some other market, but its not necessarily true in the short run, or when there is little competition for a specific class of good, or where there are market participants that are using one product to draw people into another market.

Linux-based laptops might get more support phone calls from guys who were expecting Windows, or customers who wanted to try something new but then learned that Microsoft Office does not run on their new Linux computer. Slashdot guys love to mock uneducated users, but you have to give Dell consideration that these uneducated buyers of a Linux-based laptop might cost them more money to keep happy (or less angry).

Practically? This clearly demonstrates that it pays for the windows license and is also a revenue stream.

Or, it demonstrates that there isn't a lot of competition in the market for manufacturer-optimized linux-installed laptops, and that Dell is using the lack of competition in that market to extract rents. The idea that prices can be expected to closely mirror manufacturer costs is correct so far as the expected long-term result in a competitive market where no player is pricing based on influencin

Serious question / theory – how much work does it take to tune Ubuntu to run on a laptop? I am thinking specifically of power consumption.

Assume 1. that it takes the same amount of time and dollars to tune a OS to run on a specific laptop and 2. That we are going to sell a lot more Win8 and Ubuntu.

With development dollars speared across fewer computers this would increase Dell’s price of offering free computers. Then factor in bloatware (sigh) and shorter production runs (Had drive images, I wou

Linux technical support does not cost more than Windows tech support, especially when you consider the volumes involved.

The volume of what? Windows sales to Linux sales? Let's face it, every manufacturer makes things work with Windows because it's on 90% of all PCs, as they would with any OS that's on 90% of all PCs. How many hours have they spent making sure it all works under Linux and how many sales can they divide that by? If they have to maintain that support in new versions of Ubuntu, how many sales can they divide that by? Because I'm sure people would be most unhappy if in 6 months the next Ubuntu upgrade would break it. Never mind the people who'd gladly buy the Windows version and install Ubuntu themselves to both get a dual boot machine and save $50.

The people who buy the Linux version, well they're probably going to feel entitled to some Linux support and actually use it. Just because you do have the technical skills to dig into a problem and fix it yourself, it's very convenient if you can get someone else to fix the problem for you. And they'll probably have higher expectations than the cheap outsourced Windows support who's mostly there to solve PEBCAK problems with scripts. And to be honest it's not really much of an untapped market because if people here don't like the offer they'll just pick some different model and install it themselves. It's not like you get lots of sales because you're one of few options.

Why does this sentiment never get any thought? Something tells me that Dell's bottom-line shrinks when they have to start working to support hardware on an operating system that isn't part of their core offering.

If Dell didn't put extra work into making sure everything was rock solid, the community would be complaining that Dell didn't take the time to support Linux. They actually put the effort in and the first complaint is price.

Just because Linux is free doesn't mean the cost to engineer a Linux laptop is automatically cheaper. Dell has been working with Windows for over a decade. Every time they start making inroads with Linux, the community bitches about price. I'm surprised they even try at this point.

The alternative is Dell sells the hardware and doesn't put any effort into validating compatibility with Linux and leaves it to the users, while offering rock-bottom pricing. If they do that, then all of a sudden the customer experience for folks *not* already familiar with Linux is terrible and everyone acts surprised.

Get the fuck off my lawn, you whiny little nerds.

** For the record, I use Debian as my primary desktop at home and would gladly pay for a tightly coupled experience on a laptop. It takes time to get there and realize the costs savings that is intrinsically associated with Linux being free. You have to go uphill first and reach the peak before you can start looking downhill. Why is it so hard for the Slashdot community to get that simple logic imbedded into the loosely coupled meat between their ears?

> Every time they start making inroads with Linux, the community bitches about price. I'm surprised> they even try at this point.

Well.... the community isn't putting up the cash to buy laptops, individuals are, and they are quite likely not the people bitching about price. You can't really take comments in online forum threads as an accurate meter of the community, since we know posting is done by a small and self-selected group....and overrepresents negative views.

The point is, IF you stick to Dell's corporate line of desktops/laptops (Optiplex/Precision for desktops, Latitude/Precision for laptops) they ALREADY work pretty much out of the box with Linux. With the exception of the Broadcomm wifi the Latitudes pretty much come with AND Ubuntu 12.04, my experience with quite a few older (and current model) Latitudes is they "Just_Work" with Linux. The Broadcomm/Ubuntu 12.04 issue I refer to I found on a Dell D620 which had been running 10.04 for several years with no w

You forgot to divide the cost by expected sales. Sure the actual COST of doing the work may be the same for Windows and Linux, but if you are expecting to sell 100 Windows boxes for every Linux box, each Linux box is going to have 100x more of that cost passed to the buyer.

Indeed. I don't see the problem anyway - just because it's based on free software does not mean it's free to produce a good product. I'm in the market for a new laptop and may even consider this one - but if it too comes with bloatware/shovelware, I'll probably avoid it...

Last couple of laptops I've purchased didn't seem to give me the option to opt out of the license, seemed like they just came on and wanted me to set up my user space info. SO- in one case I just wiped the drive and installed linux, I assume I paid the ransom. In another case I went ahead and used the pre-installed windows os (Xp at that time I think) for a bit until I got so annoyed I had to install Linux. In either case I wasn't presented with a EULA. In those cases how do you get your money back, assuming you paid the ransom for an unwanted windows installation? Is use of the os, even if under 30 days, implicate acceptance of the EULA and license?

You bring a new, unopened laptop in a box with the manufacturer's untouched tape still on it to the service center to request a Windows refund. It worked for me (with Acer). There's no way I extracted any value from Windows with the tape still on the box.

Agreed. My ~ $1200 13" Macbook Air has a resolution of 1440x900 (16:10) . I would expect at least the same from any "high end" 13" ultrabook. Otherwise, I'm very interested. I prefer Linux and would pay to have hardware that is WELL supported. The Air is nice, but it has quirks with Linux.

I'm not an American, but I know that: the thing I'm going to look at the most after I theoretically buy a laptop/ultrabook is the god damn SCREEN. And for that matter, the fact that it's fast and snappy is heavily counterbalanced by a shitty screen. The GP is right in a way.

This laptop I walked in and said "I want one with the non-glare display". Processor speed, ram, etc were things I found I didn't really care about (I was going to go to Crucial and max it out aftermarket anyway). The applications I'm running most of the time are Xcode, Visual Studio, and Eclipse (yes it is a MacBook Pro).

Hell I got home and had to open up the hardware screen just to see what I had bought (Quad Core i7).

1366x768 is a good resolution for a 5" phone, and usable for a 7" tablet.

Agreed. I just needed to buy a new laptop (1.5 yr old MSI just flat died) and I wound up with a Lenovo e430, with all the Intel options (Centrino Wireless, Intel 3000 graphics, etc. - i.e. working drivers). I got a 14" matte screen, a slot for an SSD (128GB Mushkin), and the lowest-power i5 that can still do AES-NI (for LUKS). I got it for $550 from Antonline via Amazon [amazon.com]. It was completely non-fussy about inheriting the 4GB DDR3 DI

I can totally see Microsoft threatening Dell's volume license if they sell the Ubuntu version for less than Windows. Maybe not in any way that would be outwardly anti-competitive, just the old mafia strategy of telling Dell you would hate it if something bad happened to their volume license.

So, if I buy the Linux version, I'm paying $50 to skip:* Download an ISO (and wait).* Convert it to a bootable USB image.* Find a spare USB stick and shove the image on.* Open the installer, click a bunch of stuff and wait for the install.

It's not hard. Typically takes maybe 0.5 to 2 hours depending mostly on the speed of your internet connection and whether you can find a spare USB stick.

Still, you can pay $50 to avoid an hour's work. Seems reasonable.

Especially to the crows of "time is money" whiners who claim that they only don't use Linux because of the time taken to set it up.

Actually, I suspect the $50 goes to pay for peripheral hardware with open source drivers. The reason so many laptops are so cheap is because much of the functionality is in closed-source driver software. Hardware that doesn't depend on a bunch of proprietary kernel code often costs a little more. Easily verified by a trip to your local computer parts emporium -- compare prices on hardware with good open source drivers versus "windows only" hardware.

From the sound of it, you are paying for a slightly customized Linux build with a lot of really well thought out features, like work "profiles" that load software tailored to certain kinds of work - the example given was Ruby developers.

Between Dell making sure the drivers work well with all of the hardware involved, and doing custom improvements over Linux tailored to developers you are not paying to skip anything - you are paying just $50 more to make sure you have a really good developer laptop.

This is the first non Mac laptop I've been interested in for years. This is a really, really smart move on the part of Dell and I can't help but think we'll see more things like it with PC makers looking to edge away from Microsoft somewhat now that MS is competing on hardware.

Alright, so they've put Ubuntu, a free OS with free applications on their computer instead of Windows. So why is it more expensive then you ask?

Well the simple explanation would actually be because it doesn't have Windows. With Windows you get the so called bloatware or trialware which is included with the installation at in almost 100% of the cases.

The software in question is there as marketing from the companies who've created that software and they pay DELL and other OEMs for the opportunity to have it installed on their machines. Hence if the operating system doesn't support their products and they can't be installed it means that they won't buy this "ad space" and that in turn leads to DELL losing out on money.

That is the simple answer to why OSS laptops are more expensive than Windows laptops

Not trolling, asking seriously: how much difference is there between an i5 and an i7? A 2 GHz i7 Air (up to 3.2 GHz -- a little higher than this XPS) is another $100.

Also, from the Ars article: "All of the additions Dell is bringing to Ubuntu 12.04 are available for free (as in beer)." So could you just buy the Windows version and configure it yourself to save $50?

That was exactly the thought I had. People like to complain that Apple hardware is expensive, but when other companies supply similar hardware in a similar form factor it always ends up costing around the same amount. If was in the market for those systems I'd be buying the Air, unless there was some other compelling reason aside from just hating on Apple.

How many times have we heard about Linux non-server products from major vendors that never showed up in retail channels? Dell. HP, and ASUS have each done that more than once.

"Ultrabooks" are just overpriced "netbooks". I rather liked the EeePC line, which is now dead. I have three of their netbooks. Remember the Eee PC X101, for under $200? The industry has stamped out low-end netbooks to boost profit margins.

Everyone calm down. It's only $50. Imagine for a second if it were $50 cheaper than the Windows version... All of Dells usual idiot customers would show up, find the computer, do a search for the model... see this linux thing... "Save $50?!?! Hell yea!" and order it... Once it arrives and they boot it up and try to install their casino poker game... they call up Dell support... "What do you mean I can't install this?!?!"

Dell NEEDS to put a barrier between the average customer and a product that could cause them a lot of support costs. They need to do their very best to make sure that only people who know what they are buying get this laptop. Money is the easiest way to do that. If you don't want to pay the $50, just order the windows version and wipe it when it arrives. It's not that hard.

The only issue I have with it is the screen resolution. Either it needs to be cheaper or have a better screen. PC makers are getting better at copying Apple but screen sizes have stagnated way too long especially now that they're charging more for ultrabooks.

If you're spending $1,499 on a laptop, another $50 isn't going to be a make it or break it thing. There could be many reasons for extra price. The cost per unit to get everything polished for Ubuntu is probably what increases the price.

If Dell can sell a polished Ultrabook experience that runs Ubuntu and they can market and demonstrate value over using Windows then this will sell. You can't sell an operating system using cost as a criteria on a $1500 laptop. The people buying it just don't care about the $50. Nor would they be swayed if the Linux version was $50 less.

The idea of the project was to create a laptop for developers, based around 'the idea that developers are the kings of IT and set the agenda for web companies, who in turn, set the agenda for the whole industry

And those developers started moving to Apple laptops en masse (as a capable UNIX system that also runs Photoshop and Omnigraffle and...) a decade ago...

These days I can't see myself handing over $1,500 for a laptop. I could buy three copies of my last laptop (which I use for development work and gaming) for that much. I don't care if it's $50 more or less than the Windows version, I want to know what about it makes Dell think anyone is going to pay that much for a laptop.

because it's UBUNTU! maybe canonical had pre-agreed to buy a bunch of them or something. maybe they were going to give them away and claim them as business expenses. or some weird shit like that.

one thing is for sure - nobody is going to pay more for having ubuntu pre-installed, out of principle if not anything else. maybe someone is crazy enough that they'll pay more in the hopes that windows license isn't paid on the machine already.

Well, surely it depends on what you do. Currently, I'm marginally mobile, which means I need a desktop replacement so I can move it if need. It's a beast: a lenovo W510 which is quite tricked out. It's very fast, ha tons of ram a good internal screen and can drive a large monitor. And it's portable in that it can be moved if necessary. And the battery life is OK.

I also have an eee 900, which cost something like $500 when it was new. I wouldn't